Suppr超能文献

改善风湿病学的就诊途径:通过回顾性图表审查评估涉及高级执业物理治疗师的纸质分诊流程的有效性。

Improving access in rheumatology: Evaluating the validity of a paper triage process involving an advanced practice physiotherapist through a retrospective chart review.

机构信息

Department of Physical Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

Rheumatology Department, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute - University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.

出版信息

Physiother Theory Pract. 2020 Jan;36(1):203-210. doi: 10.1080/09593985.2018.1482978. Epub 2018 Jun 20.

Abstract

: This study evaluated a standardized paper triage process conducted by an advanced practice physiotherapist (APP) at a rheumatology center. The aims were to (1) determine the concordance between paper triage priority assignment and the rheumatologist's diagnosis; (2) determine the sensitivity and specificity of the paper triage process; and (3) assess reasons for incorrect priority ranking. : Referrals were triaged by a formally trained APP into one of the three priorities, guided by a priority referral tool. A retrospective review of 192 charts was performed. Raw proportion of agreement between paper triage and rheumatologist's diagnosis was supplemented by a prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK). Priority categories were collapsed to calculate sensitivity and specificity. For discordant cases, additional information was collected from the referral and chart to identify potential features leading to discrepancy. : Overall agreement was 76%. The PABAK was 0.80 [95% confidence interval 0.70-0.90]. Sensitivity ranged 0.64-0.92 and specificity ranged 0.81-0.94, depending on the priority category. Forty-six cases were discordant, with the APP choosing a higher priority in 37 cases. An incorrect diagnosis from the family physician with no supporting information for the paper triage led to discordance in 16 cases. : A standardized paper triage process conducted by an APP showed substantial concordance, sensitivity, and specificity.

摘要

这项研究评估了在风湿病中心由高级实践理疗师(APP)进行的标准化纸质分诊流程。目的是:(1)确定纸质分诊优先级分配与风湿病医生诊断之间的一致性;(2)确定纸质分诊流程的灵敏度和特异性;(3)评估优先级排序错误的原因。

转诊由经过正式培训的 APP 根据优先级转诊工具分为三个优先级之一。对 192 份图表进行了回顾性审查。原始的纸质分诊与风湿病医生诊断之间的一致性比例用调整后偏倚一致性(PABAK)进行补充。优先级类别被合并以计算灵敏度和特异性。对于不一致的病例,从转诊和图表中收集了额外的信息,以确定导致差异的潜在特征。

总体一致性为 76%。PABAK 为 0.80(95%置信区间 0.70-0.90)。灵敏度范围为 0.64-0.92,特异性范围为 0.81-0.94,具体取决于优先级类别。有 46 个病例不一致,其中 37 个病例 APP 选择了更高的优先级。家庭医生的诊断错误且纸质分诊没有支持信息,导致 16 个病例不一致。

由 APP 进行的标准化纸质分诊流程具有较高的一致性、灵敏度和特异性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验